Fluid distribution systems are well known in the art. One example of a fluid distribution system is the system associated with heating, ventilating and air-conditioning (HVAC) distribution systems. HVAC distribution systems see widespread use in commercial applications, i.e., residential housing, apartment buildings, office buildings, etc. However, HVAC distribution systems also see widespread use in laboratory-type settings. In this implementation, the HVAC system is primarily intended to exhaust potentially noxious fumes, etc.
In a majority of HVAC distribution system implementations, the primary goal is to produce and distribute thermal energy in order to provide the cooling and heating needs of a particular installation. For purposes of analysis, the distribution system can be divided into two subsystems; global and local subsystems. The global subsystem consists of a primary mover (i.e., a source) which might be a fan in an air distribution system or a pump in a water distribution system. Also included in the global subsystem is the duct-work required to connect the global subsystem to the local subsystem. The local subsystem primarily consists of dampers or valves in air or water distribution systems, respectively.
Current control practice, in both commercial and laboratory HVAC distribution systems, separates the global subsystem from the local subsystem and accordingly treats the individual subsystems independent of one another. The result of this separation is (1) poor controllability, (2) energy waste throughout the system, and (3) costly commissioning (installation and maintenance) processing.
FIG. 1 generally depicts a prior art HVAC distribution system. As depicted in FIG. 1, a fan controller 103 controls the variable air volume by controlling the speed of a fan 106 so that a constant static pressure at an arbitrary duct location (for example, the location 114) is maintained. A damper 118 is controlled by a damper controller 124. The static pressure at the location 114 fluctuates as the flow requirement of the damper 118 varies. However, the fan controller 103 ignores the requirement of static pressure in the entire system so that the flow requirement of the damper 118 can be satisfied. In this scenario, the fan controller 103 attempts to maintain an arbitrarily selected pressure setpoint, which is often set based on a maximum operating design condition. During normal operating conditions, however, the system static pressure requirement is considerably lower than the design condition. This results in a considerable amount of energy waste since the fan continuously operates to satisfy the maximum static pressure setpoint. If, on the other hand, the setpoint is much lower than the system requirement, the system is incapable of satisfying the flow requirements, which results in an ineffective system. In addition, no scientific methods exist to determine the best (optimum) position of the static pressure sensor 112 within the duct 115. In other words, the positioning of the static pressure sensor 112 is more of an art than a science. Furthermore, the tuning of the VAV fan control can be time consuming and costly if the selected pressure setpoint and the position of the static pressure sensor 112 are chosen incorrectly.
In a high pressure system (when measured by the static pressure sensor 112), dampers or valves within the local subsystem must be in an almost closed position to maintain their individual set points. This, however, leads to the generation of undue noise and pressure loss in the system. In addition, dampers or valves in the almost closed position exhibit highly non linear characteristics, making tuning and controllability of these elements a challenge.
Thus, a need exists for a control system, which when implemented in a fluid distribution system, maintains controllability without the energy waste and costly commissioning process inherent in the prior art.